Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gajram Singh @ Pappu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 6 September, 2017
1
M.Cr.C.No.8885/2017
(Gajram Singh @ Pappu Vs. State of M.P. & another)
M.Cr.C.No.8884/2017
(Biharilal Vs. State of M.P. & another)
&
M.Cr.C.No.8883/2017
(Majhalu Vs. State of M.P. & another)
06.09.2017
Mr. Raja Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants.
Mr. Prakhar Dengula, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
None for respondent No.2, though served.
This order shall also dispose of M.Cr.C.No.8883/2017 & 8884/2017.
Case diary is available.
This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail. The applicants have been arrested on 25.07.2017 in connection with Crime No.119/2006 registered by Police Station Chanderi, District Ashoknagar, for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201/34 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that respondent No.2 has filed a criminal complaint against the applicants and other co-accused persons under Section 302 and 201, 149 of IPC on the allegation that the deceased who was son of the complainant was working in the field of one Lalsingh. On 07.09.2006 at about 12 AM in the night, the applicant Majhalu came to her house and informed that her son is ill and therefore, she should accompany him. As it was night and the complainant being a lady did not accompany him and on the next day in the morning, the co-accused Udhal again came to the house of the complainant for calling her. Thereafter, the 2 complainant went to the village Kutaryaah along with her son- Jagdeesh, and from she went to the house of the co-accused Sher Singh. At that time the applicants were also present there and her son was lying dead and blood was oozing out from his nostrils and foul smell was coming. When the complainant requested the accused persons to lodge a report in the Police Station then the dead body of Rajkumar was put in the tractor- trolley and all the accused persons including the applicants and the complainant along with her son also sat on the tractor- trolley. It was alleged that thereafter, in spite of the objection raised by the complainant, the last rites of deceased were performed by the applicants. Accordingly, the complaint was filed.
It is further submitted that the applicants were not aware about the pendency of the complaint. The High Court vide order dated 31.08.2006 has granted the bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C to the co-accused Edal Singh, whereas vide order dated 05.12.2007 passed in M.Cr.C.No.7056/2007, co-accused Sher Singh in whose house the dead body was found has been granted anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that thereafter, the Trial Court vide order dated 26.03.2016 granted bail to the co-accused Udal Singh who was arrested on 08.03.2016. Thus it is submitted that even if the entire allegations made in the complaint are taken on there face value then it is clear that there is no substantive evidence against the applicants which may indicate that they were any way responsible for the death of Rajkumar. On the contrary, it is mentioned in the complaint itself that in the night, the applicant-Majhalu had gone to the house of the complainant and had informed that her son is not keeping well, which clearly shows the bonafide of the 3 applicants, otherwise there was no reason for the applicants to inform the mother of the deceased. It is further submitted that the applicants are in jail for the last more than one month and the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time. There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.
Per-contra, application is opposed by the State counsel. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.
This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge bj/-